Anyway the result was a hugely exhilarating impressive nothing, nada, zilch, just the usual old sunset nothing different and the story was the same on successive nights bummer!! So the answer is, if it was there I didn't notice :(
Thursday, 22 April 2010
Ash my Ass
To answer Marks question. The first night and for all I knew the only night the ash cloud would be here and give a promised Armageddon sunset, well I was late. As a result it was a hell of a dash for a shot of the ash... cloud running a fair way, only arriving 10 mins before the sun disappeared. To make things worse it was a very low tide offering very little foreground, that and being out of breath did not help.
Anyway the result was a hugely exhilarating impressive nothing, nada, zilch, just the usual old sunset nothing different and the story was the same on successive nights bummer!! So the answer is, if it was there I didn't notice :(
Anyway the result was a hugely exhilarating impressive nothing, nada, zilch, just the usual old sunset nothing different and the story was the same on successive nights bummer!! So the answer is, if it was there I didn't notice :(
Tuesday, 20 April 2010
I Am... I'm Me
Sunday, 4 April 2010
WOOF
Forget snowdrops ;) I think the first sign that spring has sprung-ed is when you hear the call of the first Yellowhammer (yesterday) and when the first Dog Violet Erythronium dens-canis sticks it's napper above ground. Also known as a trout lily because of it's leaves.
shot with my old Pentax SMC-A 70-210mm on macro... not to bad for a lens I've had for over 20 years.... I was 2 when I got it :)
shot with my old Pentax SMC-A 70-210mm on macro... not to bad for a lens I've had for over 20 years.... I was 2 when I got it :)
Monday, 29 March 2010
Killantringan
Sunday, 28 March 2010
Friday, 26 March 2010
Arrrgh!
This is just a test shot for posting on a forum showing problems I'm having with a feathered brush used on a mask layer. This has been exaggerated to enable viewers to see the problem easily.
On Gimp if I duplicate the background layer, then alter the new layer on curves for example, then add a mask layer and use a large feathered brush at any opacity with zero hardness on the brush, it does reveal the layer below where used but leaves these concentric circles. Obviously the more the brush is used the more anomalies that are left behind. Although not very noticeable at low magnification they are still there and would probably show up on prints I assume. Does anyone know what if anything am I doing wrong as this could be effecting a large proportion of my work. Also it is more noticeable on B&W work than on colour.
On Gimp if I duplicate the background layer, then alter the new layer on curves for example, then add a mask layer and use a large feathered brush at any opacity with zero hardness on the brush, it does reveal the layer below where used but leaves these concentric circles. Obviously the more the brush is used the more anomalies that are left behind. Although not very noticeable at low magnification they are still there and would probably show up on prints I assume. Does anyone know what if anything am I doing wrong as this could be effecting a large proportion of my work. Also it is more noticeable on B&W work than on colour.
Monday, 22 March 2010
Sunday, 21 March 2010
Saturday, 20 March 2010
Wednesday, 10 March 2010
Monday, 8 March 2010
Tuesday, 2 March 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)









